[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

migrant swallows, few shorebirds Scotland Neck; negative tax for open land?



On September 1, 2002 only Killdeer (80) and perhaps one yellowlegs (heard only) were at the Winslow Sod Farm, Stamper Siding Road.

4+ Tree Swallows, 10+ Bank Swallows and 50+ Rough-winged Swallows were on wires and foraging near Kehukee Swamp where it crosses River Road. Perhaps 20 Barn Swalllows as well.

~6 Red-headed Woodpeckers in a family gave excellent views, flycatching, at the swamp at the se end of River Road where it ends in a dirt road toward Norfleet.

What if we got a law passed that 10% of every municipality, county and state had to be in open land?

Tilled farm acreage could count only as 50% of its acreage (like slaves in the original constitution counted, but not so much as free people--eventually maybe we might not even count farmland as open, or we might count it as open, depending on how it is farmed, relative to wildlife uses).
Governments would be allowed to trade their open land allotments in a free market, like trading licenses to put out pollutants. Governments could pay people to keep land open, in order to reach their required quota of open land. This would increase the value of farmland, for example, reducing the economic incentive to develop farms into subdivisions. A straightforward negative property tax on open land. A boon for undeveloped areas.
I am getting tired of losing bird species and other "wildlife".
When we think about the fact that we are not paying for our environment (air, water, vistas, wildlife), I think most people will understand that we are not paying enough in taxes. With so many people pressing on our natural resources, I do not think we can continue to "afford" a "free ride".
Think about how the NC Hunt administration said we would have a goal of so much more open land each year. That is not getting done, in the current recesssion, and will never get done until we apply some serious financial forces. We need a tax increase earmarked to pay for open land in each of our governmental units: towns, cities, counties and states; of course, some units would have monies flowing in!
One might even be effective at pressing places like Brazil and Haiti to leave land undeveloped, as we leave the same percentage of New York City and the DC and Triad and Triangle areas open! I would not mind forcing countries to keep 20% or even 50% open.


The key would be to increase the percentage each year, say, up to 50% open land in 25 years, 2% more each year.
Let the big cities either provide open land for their inhabitants or pay rural areas for the open land kept for the biggies.
I think 10% open would be ridiculously easy for governments to achieve, for starts.


-Frank Enders, Halifax, NC

_________________________________________________________________
Enter for your chance to IM with Bon Jovi, Seal, Bow Wow, or Mary J Blige using MSN Messenger http://entertainment.msn.com/imastar